Wind Turbine Payback in Pamlico County, NC
Wind turbine payback in Pamlico County
No. The turbine wears out before it pays for itself.
At 30 m, the height a home turbine tower usually reaches, the wind in Pamlico County, NC averages 4.81 m/s (10.8 mph). A 10 kW turbine there would make about 11,276 kWh a year, worth $1,685 at NC's 14.94¢/kWh. Against an installed cost of about $100,000, that is a payback of 59 years, and the turbine is built to last about 20.
What to do in Pamlico County
A home turbine is not worth buying for savings in Pamlico County unless your spot is far windier than the county average, 7.9 m/s at the hub against 4.81 m/s here. Per kW, solar panels would make about 1,288 kWh a year here against the turbine's 1,128, so get a solar quote first.
What would have to change
- Power would have to cost 44¢/kWh, 3.0 times what NC pays now.
- Or the average wind at the hub would have to be 7.9 m/s instead of 4.81. A taller tower or an exposed ridge can add some of that; a rooftop never will.
Against the rest of NC
Pamlico County is the 1,557th windiest of 3,144 US counties at turbine height; the national middle is 4.79 m/s. The windiest in NC is Dare County at 6.91 m/s, payback 25 years.
Month by month in Pamlico County
March is the strongest month here, at 5.42 m/s and about 1,314 kWh. August is the weakest, 3.90 m/s and 517 kWh, so the best month makes 2.5 times the worst. November to March brings in 50% of the year's output in Pamlico County.
| Month | Wind at 30 m | Output | Worth |
|---|---|---|---|
| January | 5.22 m/s | 1,193 kWh | $178 |
| February | 5.39 m/s | 1,172 kWh | $175 |
| March | 5.42 m/s | 1,314 kWh | $196 |
| April | 5.47 m/s | 1,302 kWh | $195 |
| May | 4.80 m/s | 952 kWh | $142 |
| June | 4.32 m/s | 681 kWh | $102 |
| July | 4.22 m/s | 658 kWh | $98 |
| August | 3.90 m/s | 517 kWh | $77 |
| September | 4.46 m/s | 747 kWh | $112 |
| October | 4.59 m/s | 840 kWh | $125 |
| November | 4.89 m/s | 968 kWh | $145 |
| December | 5.03 m/s | 1,080 kWh | $161 |
What a taller tower would buy
Measured at 10 m the wind in Pamlico County averages 3.6 m/s; at 50 m it is 5.5 m/s. That gives a shear exponent of 0.263, typical of ordinary open country. Going from 20 m to 50 m takes output from 8,302 to 16,037 kWh a year, 93% more, before counting the extra cost of the taller tower. Why tower height decides it explains the shear behind these numbers.
| Hub height | Average wind | Output | Payback |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20 m | 4.32 m/s | 8,302 kWh | 81 years |
| 30 m | 4.81 m/s | 11,267 kWh | 59 years |
| 40 m | 5.19 m/s | 13,813 kWh | 49 years |
| 50 m | 5.5 m/s | 16,037 kWh | 42 years |
Counties around Pamlico County
3 of the 6 closest counties are windier at turbine height; the windiest, Carteret County, averages 6.24 m/s.
- Carteret County, NC: 6.24 m/s, 21,484 kWh, payback 31 years (21 mi)
- Craven County, NC: 4.81 m/s, 11,276 kWh, payback 59 years (24 mi)
- Beaufort County, NC: 4.7 m/s, 10,571 kWh, payback 63 years (25 mi)
- Hyde County, NC: 5.79 m/s, 18,153 kWh, payback 37 years (34 mi)
- Jones County, NC: 4.79 m/s, 11,147 kWh, payback 60 years (40 mi)
- Washington County, NC: 4.96 m/s, 12,266 kWh, payback 55 years (48 mi)
Sun versus wind in Pamlico County
Pamlico County gets 4.41 kWh of sunshine per square metre a day on average. One kW of solar panels here would make roughly 1,288 kWh a year; one kW of the turbine above makes 1,128. Kilowatt for kilowatt, panels make 1.1 times as much here as the turbine. Panel output assumes an 80% system performance ratio. Wind or solar runs the same comparison for every county.
How this is worked out
Wind is NASA's Power climate record, the 2001-2025 average at 10 m and 50 m for the county's centre, carried to 30 m with this county's own measured wind shear and spread into hours with a Rayleigh distribution. The turbine is a generic 10 kW, 7 m rotor machine with 10% losses. Cost is $10,000 per kW installed with no tax credit, because the federal one ended in 2025. One county-centre number cannot see your hilltop or your tree line, so treat it as the starting point for a site survey, not a substitute. The full method and its weak spots are in how the numbers are made.